Contest 4 of 14
Proposition 4
Repeals Prohibition Against Public Funding of Election Campaigns. Legislative Statute.
Fiscal Impact
Short Term
State pays a few hundred thousand dollars a year to help governments with public campaign finance programs.
Long Term
Same small cost every year. (Programs governments choose to create would cost more; the LAO does not count those as this measure's cost.)
Social Impact
- The measure repeals the ban on public campaign funding, allowing state and local governments to create public financing programs for candidates who accept spending limits and meet eligibility criteria.
- Programs may not use funds earmarked for education, transportation, or public safety, and public funds may not pay legal defense costs, fines, or personal campaign loan repayments.
- Supporters say public financing will let qualified candidates compete without relying on wealthy donors or personal wealth.
- Opponents say the measure sets no limit on how many candidates can receive public funds or how much each candidate can receive.
A YES vote means:
State and local governments may create programs that use public money to help pay for election campaigns, with limits on which public funds can be used.
A NO vote means:
Public money stays banned for state and most local election campaigns in California; only some charter cities and counties may use it now.
Cost (Legislative Analyst): Ongoing costs to the state of a few hundred thousand dollars each year for the Fair Political Practices Commission to answer questions from state and local governments about public campaign finance programs.
Source: CA Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide